Re: [PATCH 1/3] remove prefix argument from pathspec_prefix

Clemens Buchacher [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

quoted

We also didn't free() in the earlier code (because we do not know if it
can be freed) and leaking xmemdupz() if the function didn't return the
"prefix", but now you plugged the small leak. Isn't it something you
should advertise?

Nah, the leak is not necessarily plugged in all callers anyway, so scratch
that part. I've rewritten it like this:

Ok.

The only other caller, though, is cmd_ls_files(). And it would be
trivial to plug that leak as well.

But is it considered a leak, if the program is going to terminate
right after the function returns?

it not a big deal to leak immediately before exit, and a patch whose sole
purpose is to plug them is of little value.

But if you are already in the vicinity, updating a function that happens
to have such a leak, the cost to decide not plugging the leak would be
about the same as plugging it, so it would be worth doing in such a case.